Captain Hindsight Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 BTW, Wikipedia is excellent, IMO. I've read where the number of mistakes on there is less than a regular book encyclopedia would normally have. I just meant in that it can be edited by ANYONE including you and me, that doesnt make it right or wrong but it has more portential to be wrong than ESPN or the AP
1B4IDie Posted March 6, 2012 Posted March 6, 2012 I just meant in that it can be edited by ANYONE including you and me, that doesnt make it right or wrong but it has more portential to be wrong than ESPN or the AP or because it can be edited by ANYONE (and actually not all pages can be edited by ANTONE some are protected to authenticated users) it has more potential to be correct than ESPN or the AP, as people tend to correct mistakes as they are found.
tito1 Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 RG3 and Andrew Luck are can't miss prospects and are far superior than any qbs coming into the league in a long time. Looking down the road to next year, I dont think early hyped guys like Barkley, Landry Jones, etc are not on that level. This is the year we should move up and get our franchise player (rg3 with luck obviously going to Indy). I'm sorry, but Fitz is not the answer. With significant improvement, maybe we get close to a playoff berth, but nothing beyond
RuntheDamnBall Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I just meant in that it can be edited by ANYONE including you and me, that doesnt make it right or wrong but it has more portential to be wrong than ESPN or the AP I can't vouch for these partiuclar outlets, but a friend of mine works for a law firm that gets calls from major media outlets all the time regarding their cases. She has said it's astounding how few of them actually do anything that could be considered fact-checking - this goes for CNN, the NY Times, Fox, etc etc.
Captain Hindsight Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 RG3 and Andrew Luck are can't miss prospects and are far superior than any qbs coming into the league in a long time. Looking down the road to next year, I dont think early hyped guys like Barkley, Landry Jones, etc are not on that level. This is the year we should move up and get our franchise player (rg3 with luck obviously going to Indy). I'm sorry, but Fitz is not the answer. With significant improvement, maybe we get close to a playoff berth, but nothing beyond I hate this argument. 3 years ago Jimmy Clausen was a "cant miss prospect" He might not be in the league next year. Remember when Brian Brohm was a number one pick candidate?
CosmicBills Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 I hate this argument. 3 years ago Jimmy Clausen was a "cant miss prospect" He might not be in the league next year. Remember when Brian Brohm was a number one pick candidate? Clausen wasn't a can't miss prospect by anyone other than fans. The GMs in the league made that clear when they let him slide. But you're right. There is always hype around QBs coming out of college. But just because there's hype doesn't mean there's fire (okay, mixing metaphors there but you get what I'm saying). In the instance of Cam Newton, Luck, and RG3 there isn't just fan hype -- there's real talent there that's IMPOSSIBLE to miss if you take the time to look at the film. Another thing to consider is that the ability of NFL scouts to correctly evaluate QBs prospects has increased in the past decade. Doesn't mean it's perfect (it's not) but it's WAY more accurate now than ever before. Most of this is due to the fact that High School teams are throwing the ball more than ever before, creating many more polished passers coming out of HIGH SCHOOL. Guys are now being scouted and evaluated from the time they're 15. The entire league now knows QB is the most important position on the field and every team is after their own marquee QB. That means there's more attention than ever before focused on how to properly determine who can succeed and who can't.
tito1 Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 RG3 will be a top 5 qb for the next decade. Dream is over with skins having tr balls to make the move. We will draft an OT and be a solid 6-10, right in that 10 draft spot to stay mediocre and miss on future top talents in years to come.
DrDawkinstein Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 ESPN reporting that a deal between the Rams and Redskins has been tentatively agreed to. Redskins offering 3 1st round picks (2012, 13, 14) and their 2nd pick (2012). Deal cant be official until Free Agency starts. If that's the deal we'd have to beat, then we're obviously out of the race. RG3 is worth a big trade, but more than 3 1sts and 1 2nd means this team's entire future...
Mr. WEO Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 Really?? Those 3 extra picks to the Rams would be the Bills "entire future"? Come on! How many 1st rounders are true starters on this team? Buddy was never interested in RG3 and the Rams didn't want number 10.
Beerball Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 ESPN reporting that a deal between the Rams and Redskins has been tentatively agreed to. Redskins offering 3 1st round picks (2012, 13, 14) and their 2nd pick (2012). Deal cant be official until Free Agency starts. If that's the deal we'd have to beat, then we're obviously out of the race. RG3 is worth a big trade, but more than 3 1sts and 1 2nd means this team's entire future... 3 Firsts? What about the first that the Redskins are getting back, does that cancel out one of those picks? If I were a Washington fan I would be very happy today. Sure thing? Nope, no such thing. A really good looking option to lead that team? Yup.
Mr. WEO Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 3 Firsts? What about the first that the Redskins are getting back, does that cancel out one of those picks? If I were a Washington fan I would be very happy today. Sure thing? Nope, no such thing. A really good looking option to lead that team? Yup. Beerball is right, the Skuns are giving up 3 total picks--2 future 1s and a 2. I bet the Skins fans have no problem with this at all.
DC Tom Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 or because it can be edited by ANYONE (and actually not all pages can be edited by ANTONE some are protected to authenticated users) it has more potential to be correct than ESPN or the AP, as people tend to correct mistakes as they are found. In theory. In fact, edits have to get through the editors, who may or may not accept them. And in practice...well, I've corrected articles and had the corrections rejected because my primary source for the correction wasn't a web site. Beerball is right, the Skuns are giving up 3 total picks--2 future 1s and a 2. I bet the Skins fans have no problem with this at all. Skins fans are more psychologically whipped than we are. If they have no problem, it's because they've stopped caring.
papazoid Posted March 10, 2012 Posted March 10, 2012 i applaud washingtons bold move..... but those who think the Rams got the better of this deal.....here is an interesting take.... i went back and looked at the last five drafts....to see who had "multiple" first round picks in "back 2 back" years.....which is what the rams will have in 2013 & 2014. lots of examples of multiple picks in one year......but in B2B seasons... it has happened twice.....both examples were B2B in years 2009 & 2010... drum roll..... Detroit and Denver..... both teams having made the playoffs last year.
DrDawkinstein Posted March 11, 2012 Posted March 11, 2012 Really?? Those 3 extra picks to the Rams would be the Bills "entire future"? Come on! How many 1st rounders are true starters on this team? Buddy was never interested in RG3 and the Rams didn't want number 10. 3 Firsts? What about the first that the Redskins are getting back, does that cancel out one of those picks? If I were a Washington fan I would be very happy today. Sure thing? Nope, no such thing. A really good looking option to lead that team? Yup. First, you both missed my point. I said: If that's the deal we'd have to beat, then we're obviously out of the race. RG3 is worth a big trade, but more than 3 1sts and 1 2nd means this team's entire future... To be in this race, it's going to cost us MORE than the Redskins offer. Say what you will about the Redskins offer (trading away their draft picks has worked so well for them in the past ), but for the Bills to have a shot at RG3 means our first round picks in 2013 and 2014, and most likely our 2nd round picks in 2012 and 2013, and probably another pick as well. Investing 5-6 early picks in one player is foolish. I dont care who that player is. If you are a Redskins fan, and you are happy about this trade, then you havent been paying attention to your team for the past decade. Big name Free Agent busts, trading picks and having no draft... it's a path to failure. They'll move up and get an elite player, and have no one around him, and no ability to surround him with talent. Recipe for disaster.
1B4IDie Posted March 11, 2012 Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) First, you both missed my point. I said: To be in this race, it's going to cost us MORE than the Redskins offer. Say what you will about the Redskins offer (trading away their draft picks has worked so well for them in the past ), but for the Bills to have a shot at RG3 means our first round picks in 2013 and 2014, and most likely our 2nd round picks in 2012 and 2013, and probably another pick as well. Investing 5-6 early picks in one player is foolish. I dont care who that player is. If you are a Redskins fan, and you are happy about this trade, then you havent been paying attention to your team for the past decade. Big name Free Agent busts, trading picks and having no draft... it's a path to failure. They'll move up and get an elite player, and have no one around him, and no ability to surround him with talent. Recipe for disaster. The redskins O-line has been horrible for the last 5+ years and unless they spend picks 3-7 on o-line RGIII is going to get killed bu the Giants. I don't care how fast he runs the 40 if you have 4 turnstiles in front of you, you're gonna take a beating. Edited March 11, 2012 by Why So Serious?
nucci Posted March 11, 2012 Posted March 11, 2012 The Redskins are trying to obtain their franchise QB. I have no problem with that. No way the Rams were going to drop to 10th and trade with us. The problem with the Redskins is that they are always trading picks and have yet to build a solid group of young players.
DrDawkinstein Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 Welp, the Redskins just lost $36 million in cap space over the next 2 years. How does trading away all your 1st round picks look now? Are the fans still happy about it? I hope that RG3 can carry an entire team by himself, since they wont be able to sign or draft anyone else. Man, talk about setting the kid up to fail...
Beerball Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 Welp, the Redskins just lost $36 million in cap space over the next 2 years. How does trading away all your 1st round picks look now? Are the fans still happy about it? I hope that RG3 can carry an entire team by himself, since they wont be able to sign or draft anyone else. Man, talk about setting the kid up to fail... Please Doc, you're too smart for this aren't you?
DrDawkinstein Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 Please Doc, you're too smart for this aren't you? Obviously I am, since I thought it was a bad move before today's news
Recommended Posts